Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 23:46:01 05/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 19, 2000 at 00:20:10, Albert Silver wrote: [snip] >The State Championship should have had cries of protest from the beginning, but >as to the rest they were opens and not the title-holding event. When were they >ever allowed in a National Championship? I thought about this statment for a bit and it intrigues me. What *exactly* is the difference between a state championship and a national championship besides the degree of bragging rights? When a computer won a state championship, it dethroned a human from that honorable spot and relegated them to second place. The same exact thing would happen if it won a national championship. There is a funny thing about sports. When (for instance) Bobby Fischer won the 'world championship' all the American chests swelled with pride. But were they any better at chess than they were the day before he won? Of course not. But we identify ourselves with the same label "American" if we are from America. I imagine that it is very similar for other countries where a national champion wins the world championship. I think that is why we object. We want the warm fuzzy feeling of that coveted label to warm us like some familiar baby blanket. Machines are cold[1] and hard[2]. It's a lot harder to identify. [1] Kryotech equipment is featured at many computer chess championships. [2] Well, not all that hard. Diamonds are much harder. But Silicon and steel are both harder than flesh. Even plastic has us beat there. [snip]
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.